water Article Does Engagement Build Empathy for Shared Water Resources? Results from the Use of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index during a Mobile Water Allocation Experimental Decision Laboratory Lori Bradford 1 , Kwok P. Chun 2 , Rupal Bonli 3 and Graham Strickert 1,* 1 School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A2, Canada; [email protected] 2 Department of Geography, Hong Kong Baptist University, Baptist University Rd, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong 999077; [email protected] 3 Saskatoon Health Region, Saskatoon City Hospital, 701 Queen Street, Saskatoon, SK S7K 0M7, Canada; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-306-966-2403 Received: 12 April 2019; Accepted: 14 June 2019; Published: 16 June 2019 Abstract: Currently, there are no tools that measure improvements in levels of empathy among diverse water stakeholders participating in transboundary decision-making. In this study, we used an existing empathy scale from clinical psychology during an Experimental Decision Laboratory (EDL) where participants allocated water across a transboundary basin during minor and major drought conditions. We measured changes in empathy using a pre-test/post-test design and triangulated quantitative results with open-ended survey questions. Results were counter-intuitive. For most participants, levels of the four components of empathy decreased after participating in the EDL; however, significant demographically-driven differences emerged. Qualitative results confounded the problem through the capture of participant perceptions of increased overall empathy and perspective taking specifically. Implications for methodological tool development, as well as practice for water managers and researchers are discussed. Water empathy is a particularly sensitive construct that requires specialized intervention and measurement. Keywords: water security; empathy; interpersonal reactivity index; experimental decision laboratory; transboundary water management 1. Introduction The notion of bringing the right number and representation of diverse stakeholders with the right frequency to the decision table for shared resources like water is understood as a key practice for increasing resource security [1,2]. Participatory approach frameworks, toolkits, and reviews abound for a variety of resource security issues [3–5]. The effectiveness of participatory approaches for enhancing security of resources has been investigated with key performance indicators typically chosen by hierarchical agents [6,7]. The indicators have included species biodiversity and/or population declines, nutrient balances, emission and pollutant levels, resource use, energy use, and other biophysical measures [8,9]. The effectiveness has been evaluated using absolute data, trend data, and normalized data and effectiveness studies have started to include human dimensions such as participant learning [10,11]. An area lacking in evaluation of participatory resource security performance has been the objective evaluation of whether participants experience an increased level of awareness and Water 2019, 11, 1259; doi:10.3390/w11061259 www.mdpi.com/journal/water Water 2019, 11, 1259 2 of 16 sensitivity to each other’s plights. It is hypothesized that such an increase would contribute to more equitable sharing of resources and thus security [12]. In this paper, we describe an approach for measuring ‘water empathy’ among stakeholders participating in natural resources decision scenarios which involved allocating water across three regions, and four broad sectors of society within each region in a transboundary river basin. While the drivers of water security in the study basin are examined elsewhere [13], this paper specifically examines the use of an empathy scale from clinical psychology to better understand whether the experimental decision laboratory could invoke changes in people’s ability to share and understand the thinking and feelings of other stakeholders in water allocation decisions. Empathy, Water Empathy, and Its Measurement There are many different definitions of empathy and a long history of debate over its constructs [14–16]. In clinical and developmental psychology, empathy is defined as the act of putting oneself in the other’s place, a psychological stance toward another with intentionality, and is differentiated from confronting, advising, correcting or teaching [17–20]. Empathy develops through a two-part process: (1) establishing and maintaining affective resonance with another, and (2) learning to change this resonance into shared language and mutually beneficial action [21]. Psychological scales measuring empathy emerged in the 1950s and evolved to include affective components such as emotional distress, and cognitive components such as perspective taking [22–28]. Changes in participant levels of empathy have been studied indirectly in various resource management contexts. Explorations of social capital and self-interest in farming, forest management, fisheries, and community-based collaborative resource management groups indicate three key findings. First, participants rely on past experience and habits more often than previously recognized for decisions with downstream impacts [29]. Second, social capital is enhanced among groups and agencies but not between individuals [2,30,31]. Third, there is little emphasis on listening to all participant needs at the outset of resource management decision making, and instead value struggles are dealt with post hoc [32,33]. These three problems contribute to poor management decision outcomes such as resource conflicts, and lead to the conclusion that policies need to invoke mutual understanding among participatory resource management groups [34–36]. In this study, the term water empathy is coined as the ability to understand and be responsive to the water needs of another group or sector using a shared water resource. Acts of water empathy have been noted in the past with physical actions, such as senior license owners in a heavily allocated Canadian river system transferring allocations to help other sectors and, social learning, such as collaborative information sharing in Australia’s Lower Burdekin for better natural resource management and decreased impacts to the Great Barrier Reef [37,38]. In the context of water management, few studies to date have explored whether current participatory research approaches examining policies for transboundary water contributed to creating empathy among water managers and stakeholders and thus better resource management performance. Anecdotal evidence suggests that it does [1]. To this end, this study was undertaken to test a psychological empathy scale as a starting point towards developing a tool for measuring changes in water empathy among water managers, stakeholders and right’s holders across a transboundary river basin during engagement activities. 2. Materials and Methods As a part of a larger research program examining the human dimensions of water security, water allocation preferences, and management practices across the Saskatchewan River Basin in the Prairie Provinces of Canada, a mobile experimental decision laboratory (EDL) was developed. The EDL was a computer-based simulation of a transboundary river basin that was undergoing a mild or severe drought and was based on conditions in the history of the Saskatchewan River Basin, Canada. After ethics approval was received (University of Saskatchewan, BEH-13-386), participants who were involved in water use, management, energy sectors, Indigenous communities, and water research were Water 2019, 11, 1259 3 of 16 contacted using phone and/or email invitations to take part in one of the EDL workshops. A letter and consent form describing the research and its aims was distributed prior to the EDL occurring. During the EDL itself, participants went through several rounds of having to allocate water to different sectors under different policy constraints and communication boundaries. These boundaries (i.e., separation of participants for certain rounds, timed communication opportunities) were kept consistent. Instructions were scripted so that each occurrence of the EDL followed the established protocol. The EDL was a mobile unit; that is, personnel and computers/other equipment were transported to different cities within the basin over a four-month period. Participants used the exact same equipment in each EDL event. Five different EDL events took place between January and April 2015 in Canmore, Alberta; Medicine Hat, Alberta; Northern Village of Cumberland House, Saskatchewan; and two in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada. The EDL protocol and results have been reported elsewhere [39]; however, out of interest in evaluating empathy among water managers, pre- and post-test of levels of empathy were included in the EDL sessions. This paper reports on those results. The researchers collaborated with a clinical psychologist to select an appropriate scale, pilot test the scale, and evaluate the results. 2.1. The Davis (1980) Interpersonal Reactivity Index The Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) measures four components of empathy, three of which are of an affective (emotional) nature and a fourth component that is more cognitively-based [40]. The three affective components include fantasy (the tendency to identify strongly with fictitious characters), empathic concern (the tendency to experience feelings of compassion and concern for others undergoing negative experiences), and